trolly is a wussy wrote:
Every post you make is 0/10. I've never seen a more biased poster on a thread since I've been on this site.
-1/10. You are obvious new here, despite your lie claiming otherwise.
trolly is a wussy wrote:
Every post you make is 0/10. I've never seen a more biased poster on a thread since I've been on this site.
-1/10. You are obvious new here, despite your lie claiming otherwise.
Billionaire coal baron Governor Jim "Turncoat" Justice is asking Trump for a $4.5 billion dollar bailout for the coal industry in his state. He is selling the idea of spending public money to prop up his dying business as a national security measure.
An extra $4.5 billion could do wonders in West Virginia if it were used to retrain workers for jobs that aren't doomed, or support small businesses and entrepreneurs in the state, or update its failing infrastructure, or improve broadband access. But Governor Turncoat wants to spend it on himself. For our safety. What a guy!
why we elected him wrote:
Trump has already made improvements to our nuclear arsenal so Kim Jong Un should be scared.
I'm sure you only repeated this because you know it's a lie and as a Trumper, you think lies are funny.
It was Obama who started the program of upgrading our nuclear arsenal. When candidate Trump was asked his opinion about it, he didn't even know what the nuclear triad was.
We have a president who is clueless about this stuff. It's definitely not funny.
Mall Cop Paul Blairdumb wrote:
Rich people got Trump into office? You are delusional on every level. Do you make this stuff up from your Mom's basement or your local library? Hillary barely won the popular vote, percentage wise, so I didn't realize that almost half the voters were rich.
Deer Hardloper: 0/10
Trump won every category of voters over $50K. They were all close margins, but he won them all nonetheless.Hillary dominated the under $50K crowd.So- and I can't believe I'm agreeing with Agip on something- Yes, you could say that rich people got Trump into office.He won the suburbs.He won college-educated whites.He won males handily (especially white males- like 63% I believe).So, yeah. The rich people voted for Trump. Especially if it wasn't hand-me-down money.
Mall Cop Paul Blairdumb wrote:
Rich people got Trump into office? You are delusional on every level. Do you make this stuff up from your Mom's basement or your local library? Hillary barely won the popular vote, percentage wise, so I didn't realize that almost half the voters were rich.
Yeah, huh? is right, you're demented pal.
eric a blair wrote:huh? rich people got Trump into office. Rich people got all the repubs into office. Repubs are the rich party, with a wing of rednecks.
Guaranteed, Trump will do something for rich people.
And guaranteed Trump will do something for the rednecks - he will give them racial pride back. Trump will insult and stop trying to help the brown people.
And Trump will continue to heckle and needle the elites that the rednecks hate so much.
Remember the two core motivating principles of Trumpism: white nationalism and anti-elites.
Trump will do something about that all right. Already has.
foo fighter wrote:
Meanwhile, forensic experts say the DNC hack was inside job, NOT Russians! Where's the DNC server? I wonder if Debbie Wasserman Shultz ordered BleachBit and hammers to do the job.
http://ijr.com/the-declaration/2017/08/944692-bombshell-report-dnc-hack-forensic-experts-claims-inside-job-not-russians/
So we shouldn't trust the FBI, the CIA, the NSA, and all of our other intelligence agencies. Those agencies have access to mountains of intelligence about the subject, including spies in the Kremlin. We shouldn't trust CrowdStrike, a top private cyber security firm, who was the first to do a forensic investigation.
Instead, we should trust your "forensic experts" that nobody ever heard of.
But I did look into the actual claims you are talking about. It only concerns one DNC hack. It doesn't shed any light on the Podesta email hack, the hack of state election systems, the use of bots to plant fake news, the possible targeting of certain swing voters, etc. In short, your "forensic experts" don't try to say that the evidence against Russia is phony.
What do they say? They claim that the one DNC hack came from inside the DNC or at least from a computer the east coast. They base this completely on download speed. I don't know how they got the information about the download speed of the hack in question and I don't have time to look into it further.
But let's assume they are right. If so, then they have narrowed down the hack to "some computer on the east coast". That's a long way from saying it was an inside job. It's even a long way from saying that Russia wasn't behind it.
In fact, if they are right, it doesn't even prove that the hack didn't originate in Russia. All it would mean is that the data was first downloaded to some local device before it was transferred to Guccifer. It could have still been controlled by hackers in Russia. Or it could have been controlled by Russians in the US.
Wow. That's some scoop.
eric a blair wrote:
L L wrote:No way they do anything that helps the people that got them into office.
huh? rich people got Trump into office. Rich people got all the repubs into office. Repubs are the rich party, with a wing of rednecks.
Guaranteed, Trump will do something for rich people.
And guaranteed Trump will do something for the rednecks - he will give them racial pride back. Trump will insult and stop trying to help the brown people.
And Trump will continue to heckle and needle the elites that the rednecks hate so much.
Remember the two core motivating principles of Trumpism: white nationalism and anti-elites.
Trump will do something about that all right. Already has.
As if the dems have no wealthy elites? Bezos, Zuckerberg, Musk, and Gates backed their queen, Hillary. You dems have all of wingnuts in Hollywood, inner city blacks and illegal aliens looking for all that free stuff. Agip, you look down upon blue collar workers if they voted Trump. Trump won the Michigan redneck/auto workers- you loved them in 2008 and 2012, yet you scorn them now. Make up your mind. That is a loser elitist attitude you have. You will bend over backwards for a minority or flyover state resident as long as they are democrats. God forbid, they voted for Trump.
If all of the really rich people that voted for Trump had voted for Hillary instead, Trump wold have still won the election.
The wealthy didn't carry Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan.
L L wrote:
If all of the really rich people that voted for Trump had voted for Hillary instead, Trump wold have still won the election.
The wealthy didn't carry Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan.
stop with the extremes. republicans are richer than dems on average. The average trump voter is richer than the average Hillary voter. Rs are richer than Ds. Has been like that for decades. Rs elected Trump.
Sorry if you all don't understand that.
That said, this election had a weird twist where in key places maybe 100k unrich Obama voters switched into Trump voters. It was a small number of people, but it did happen.
He could have had made some minor mistakes improvements made. Of course this doesn't mean he did them himself. He could had made them more ready to employ.Trump was not going to stand around and do nothing while Kim Jong Un threatens peace. I want Trump to be Trump.
Fat hurts wrote:
why we elected him wrote:Trump has already made improvements to our nuclear arsenal so Kim Jong Un should be scared.
I'm sure you only repeated this because you know it's a lie and as a Trumper, you think lies are funny.
It was Obama who started the program of upgrading our nuclear arsenal. When candidate Trump was asked his opinion about it, he didn't even know what the nuclear triad was.
We have a president who is clueless about this stuff. It's definitely not funny.
minor mistakeshathis is the problem. trumpers are too stupid and/or ignorant to know the major mistakes trump makes. They have no clue.
Why we elected him wrote:
He could have had made some minor mistakes improvements made. Of course this doesn't mean he did them himself. He could had made them more ready to employ.
Trump was not going to stand around and do nothing while Kim Jong Un threatens peace. I want Trump to be Trump.
Fat hurts wrote:I'm sure you only repeated this because you know it's a lie and as a Trumper, you think lies are funny.
It was Obama who started the program of upgrading our nuclear arsenal. When candidate Trump was asked his opinion about it, he didn't even know what the nuclear triad was.
We have a president who is clueless about this stuff. It's definitely not funny.
eric a blair wrote:
L L wrote:If all of the really rich people that voted for Trump had voted for Hillary instead, Trump wold have still won the election.
The wealthy didn't carry Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan.
stop with the extremes. republicans are richer than dems on average. The average trump voter is richer than the average Hillary voter. Rs are richer than Ds. Has been like that for decades. Rs elected Trump.
Sorry if you all don't understand that.
That said, this election had a weird twist where in key places maybe 100k unrich Obama voters switched into Trump voters. It was a small number of people, but it did happen.
Both sides need to concede a bit in this argument.
1) Trump won more middle, upper-middle and upper-class voters than Hillary, but
2) by a smaller margin than recent past elections.
However, it was (and is?) deceitfully portrayed by the media/establishment as "Trump is only going to get the old, white, male, rural, poor vote.....and have trouble everywhere else, including the suburbs." I can't tell you how many articles I read leading up to the election about how Hillary was doing so well in the suburbs. This simply wasn't the case. She lost the burbs 50-45. It was just such an ignorant narrative to use because rural America is only 15% of the population. So rural white males would be, what, 6-7%? Why spend any time even talking about those people? Elections are won in the burbs.
I think it'd be more accurate to say he won by maintaining enough of the rich vote edge (very slim), while converting a critical portion of the middle class and upper-middle class vote. He converted 300-400 counties that voted for Obama at least once. That's what put him over the edge.
If Johnson wasn't in the running, Trump probably wins Minnesota too, as it was the closest election result there in a long time.
If Putin threatened Guam with a nuclear strike, Trump would tell us that Guam isn't really part of REAL America anyway and would thank Putin for getting rid of all of the unnecessarily expensive military payroll and equipment we keep over there. "You can have it. We don't even want it. Worthless puny island."
Eye Phone wrote:
eric a blair wrote:stop with the extremes. republicans are richer than dems on average. The average trump voter is richer than the average Hillary voter. Rs are richer than Ds. Has been like that for decades. Rs elected Trump.
Sorry if you all don't understand that.
That said, this election had a weird twist where in key places maybe 100k unrich Obama voters switched into Trump voters. It was a small number of people, but it did happen.
Both sides need to concede a bit in this argument.
1) Trump won more middle, upper-middle and upper-class voters than Hillary, but
2) by a smaller margin than recent past elections.
However, it was (and is?) deceitfully portrayed by the media/establishment as "Trump is only going to get the old, white, male, rural, poor vote.....and have trouble everywhere else, including the suburbs." I can't tell you how many articles I read leading up to the election about how Hillary was doing so well in the suburbs. This simply wasn't the case. She lost the burbs 50-45. It was just such an ignorant narrative to use because rural America is only 15% of the population. So rural white males would be, what, 6-7%? Why spend any time even talking about those people? Elections are won in the burbs.
I think it'd be more accurate to say he won by maintaining enough of the rich vote edge (very slim), while converting a critical portion of the middle class and upper-middle class vote. He converted 300-400 counties that voted for Obama at least once. That's what put him over the edge.
If Johnson wasn't in the running, Trump probably wins Minnesota too, as it was the closest election result there in a long time.
sounds about right.
except the MN issue - I'm not sure about that part
You're the problem. I can't figure out if I'd choose you or Trollminator as the most ignorant uninformed poster on this thread, if not the entire site. I'll give Fat Hurts a pass as at least he's admitted he's been wrong and he's not such a stubborn prick like Blairminator. You 2 are certifiable morons:)
eric a blair wrote:
minor mistakes
ha
this is the problem. trumpers are too stupid and/or ignorant to know the major mistakes trump makes. They have no clue.
Why we elected him wrote:He could have had made some minor mistakes improvements made. Of course this doesn't mean he did them himself. He could had made them more ready to employ.
Trump was not going to stand around and do nothing while Kim Jong Un threatens peace. I want Trump to be Trump.
eric a blair wrote:
Eye Phone wrote:Both sides need to concede a bit in this argument.
1) Trump won more middle, upper-middle and upper-class voters than Hillary, but
2) by a smaller margin than recent past elections.
However, it was (and is?) deceitfully portrayed by the media/establishment as "Trump is only going to get the old, white, male, rural, poor vote.....and have trouble everywhere else, including the suburbs." I can't tell you how many articles I read leading up to the election about how Hillary was doing so well in the suburbs. This simply wasn't the case. She lost the burbs 50-45. It was just such an ignorant narrative to use because rural America is only 15% of the population. So rural white males would be, what, 6-7%? Why spend any time even talking about those people? Elections are won in the burbs.
I think it'd be more accurate to say he won by maintaining enough of the rich vote edge (very slim), while converting a critical portion of the middle class and upper-middle class vote. He converted 300-400 counties that voted for Obama at least once. That's what put him over the edge.
If Johnson wasn't in the running, Trump probably wins Minnesota too, as it was the closest election result there in a long time.
sounds about right.
except the MN issue - I'm not sure about that part
Johnson received 112K votes.
And Evan McMullin received 53K!!
Hillary won the state by just 44K.
That's 165K votes that were much more likely to go to Trump than Hillary. (I didn't realize McMullin did so well there.)
I'd say there's a pretty strong argument that if Johnson and/or McMullin don't enter, Trump wins Minnesota.
actually, yeah. The son of hte president, the trump campaign manager and the son in law met with an russian intel officer and a russian government lawyer to get dirt on Hillary clinton. And then covered it up by failing to disclose it on their security clearance forms. there are recordings of russian intelligence officers bragging about how close they are to the trump campaign. So yeah. and that's leaving aside the fact the campaign manager's home was raided by the FBI.
exthrower wrote:
Hey Eric....Any collusion yet?...lol.....You got 7 years to come up with something...good luck...
That stat that is often quoted that I feel is wrong at least misleading is regarding college educated voting for Trump.
Educated people did not vote for Trump they voted Hillary. Hillary won in the category of those who received post college education.
Apparently people who claimed to have a college education tipped the scales toward Trump. Keep in mind this is a self report, so people can define college educated many ways. They could be a lie factor involved.
In my clear experience professionals and those with advanced degrees went heavily for Hillary.
I didn't type in mistakes but auto correct must have put that in the post. I trust Trump's behavior that's out of the box. So far it has worked. (Originally dems wanted Trump to win the nomination because they thought he would bring down all Republican candidates)What Trump says can work because he is viewed as a loose cannon. Kim Jung Un thinks Trump could actually do what he threatens. No other president would scare KJU as much as Trump.Trump uses the fact others think of him as reckless to his advantage. His instincts are good here.
eric a blair wrote:
minor mistakes
ha
this is the problem. trumpers are too stupid and/or ignorant to know the major mistakes trump makes. They have no clue.
Why we elected him wrote:He could have had made some minor mistakes improvements made. Of course this doesn't mean he did them himself. He could had made them more ready to employ.
Trump was not going to stand around and do nothing while Kim Jong Un threatens peace. I want Trump to be Trump.
Putin Pawpet wrote:
If Putin threatened Guam with a nuclear strike, Trump would tell us that Guam isn't really part of REAL America anyway and would thank Putin for getting rid of all of the unnecessarily expensive military payroll and equipment we keep over there. "You can have it. We don't even want it. Worthless puny island."
Trump would say the same about Alaska. Take it back. It is not connected to the U.S. It's a bigly ice folly. Sarah will learn Russian.